SRINAGAR: The Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has acquitted Mohammad Ashraf Ganie in a 2007 rape case, setting aside his conviction and sentence after finding that the prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Justice Sanjay Parihar, in a judgment pronounced on September 29, 2026, allowed Ganie’s appeal against the judgment of conviction dated October 10, 2023 and the order of sentence dated November 7, 2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Budgam. The High Court directed that he be released forthwith if he was not required in any other case.
Ganie had been convicted under Sections 376, 450 and 506 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) in connection with FIR No. 309/2007 registered at Police Station Budgam. The trial court had sentenced him to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1 lakh under Section 376 RPC, five years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 450 and one year’s simple imprisonment under Section 506, with the sentences to run concurrently.
The High Court held that the cumulative effect of inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence, particularly the change from an initial allegation of an “attempt” to commit rape to a case of completed rape, limitations in the medical evidence and uncertainty surrounding the timing of the medical examination created reasonable doubt.
The case arose from an alleged incident of July 15, 2007. According to the prosecution, the woman was alone at home while her father was away in Srinagar and her mother had taken her younger sister to hospital. The prosecution alleged that Ganie entered the house, bolted the door, threatened the woman and forcibly subjected her to sexual intercourse before leaving.
A complaint was subsequently lodged and FIR No. 309/2007 was registered on July 16, 2007 under Sections 376/511 RPC. During investigation, the police dropped Section 511 and invoked Section 376 after receiving the medical opinion that sexual intercourse had taken place. Sections 450 and 506 RPC were also added.
The High Court noted that the Investigating Officer, ASI Mohammad Yousuf, had acknowledged that the statements of the material witnesses recorded during investigation initially referred to an “attempt” to commit rape. The court said the distinction between an attempted and completed sexual act was not a minor discrepancy because it went to the very nature of the principal offence.
The court also examined the medical evidence. Dr Rubeena, who examined the woman, found no marks of violence but opined that sexual intercourse had taken place. The court observed that the medical findings could establish, at most, that the woman had previously experienced sexual intercourse. They could not establish when the intercourse occurred or identify the person involved.
The High Court further noted that the doctor could not determine precisely when the intercourse had taken place. It also found uncertainty regarding the timing of the medical examination, with the doctor stating that the woman had been produced before her after about five days, while other evidence suggested an earlier examination.
“No biological or forensic material” connecting Ganie with the alleged act was obtained, the court noted. It also held that the medical evidence could not establish whether the intercourse was consensual or non-consensual.
At the same time, the court clarified that the absence of injuries or an independent eyewitness does not, by itself, discredit a sexual assault prosecution. It reiterated that the testimony of a prosecutrix can form the sole basis of conviction if it is reliable and inspires confidence. However, the prosecution must still prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The court found that several discrepancies relied upon by the defence, considered individually, were peripheral, including variations concerning timings, the place where the complainant was working and the circumstances surrounding the lodging of the complaint. However, it held that these discrepancies had to be assessed cumulatively alongside the more significant variation concerning the nature of the alleged sexual act.
The High Court also considered Ganie’s plea of alibi that he had been in Srinagar on the day of the alleged occurrence. The court found that the defence had not satisfactorily established the alibi, particularly as Khazir Ganie, whom the appellant had identified as the best witness to prove his presence in Srinagar, was never examined. The evidence of defence witness Gh Mohammad Ganie was also found to be internally inconsistent.
However, the court stressed that failure to establish an alibi could not be treated as affirmative proof of the prosecution case.
“A weakness in the defence cannot supply a deficiency in the prosecution case,” the court held in substance, observing that the prosecution had to succeed on the strength of its own evidence.
The court similarly declined to treat the alleged monetary dispute between Ganie and the complainant as decisive, holding that even if the appellant failed to establish a motive for false implication, that did not relieve the prosecution of its burden.
After independently reappraising the evidence, the High Court concluded that the prosecution had not crossed the threshold of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
It accordingly set aside the 2023 conviction and sentence and acquitted Ganie of the charges under Sections 376, 450 and 506 RPC by extending to him the benefit of doubt.
The court directed his immediate release if he was not required in any other case and ordered the trial court record to be returned along with a copy of the judgment.
